HARDEV SINGH Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called the Code) is for quashing the entire proceeding of G.R. Case No, 1535 of 96 on the basis of charge-sheet No. 50 of 2001 dated 14.8.2001 arising out of Rajganj P.S. Case No. 82 dated 6.12.1996 under Sections 379 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter called I.P.C.) read with Sections 39 and 44 of the Indian Electricity Act (hereinafter called the Act).

(2.) Learned Advocate for the petitioners contended that the F.I.R. was lodged on 6.12.1996 against unknown persons for alleged offence under Section 379 of the I.P.C. and Section 39 of the Act by one K. K. Bhowmick, Assistant Engineer, Jalpaiguri (OS.M.) of W.B.S.E.B. On the basis of the complaint or F.I.R., Rajganj P.S. Case No. 82 dated 6.12.1996 was started and subsequently Section 44 of the Act was added. After completing investigation the Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet No. 50 dated 14.8.2001 and receiving it on 23.8.2001 learned S.D.J.M., Jalpaiguri took cognizance of the offence against the petitioners. Taking of congizance by the learned Magistrate was bad-in-law and illegal being barred by limitation as the charge-sheet was filed on 14.8.2001 under Section 379 of the I.P.C. and 39 and 44 of the Act, though the F.I.R. was lodged on 6.12.1996 wherein date of occurrence was mentioned as prior to 5.12.1996. The mandatory provisions of Section 468 of the Code were violated and the learned Magistrate erred in law in taking cognizance of offence. The entire prosecution has become barred by limitation in view of provisions of Section 468 of the Code. Therefore, the entire proceeding including the charge-sheet in G.R. Case No. 1535 of 1996 now pending before learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Jalpaiguri should be quashed. In support of his contention he placed two decisions reported in 1981 (3) SCC 34, 1988 (4) SCC 36 and 1986 C Cr. LR (Cal) 1.

(3.) Learned Advocate appearing for the State submitted that there is no illegality in the order and taking cognizance. Learned S.D.J.M. taking cognizance of offence after receiving charge-sheet transferred the case to the learned Magistrate for trial and there is no illegality. .